Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Andrew Reid

YouTube to start removing videos with indie label music (Radiohead included)

Recommended Posts

So how does current copyrights work??? I've read about it for a little bit and I'm still confused. From what I understand currently you can use any music for personal work, is that right? Now, when you publish it on youtube/vimeo it's not personal work anymore because you share it with people you don't know/promote yourself, is that correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

I am not advocating for all so-called artists to be able to make a living from their art.

What doesn't work is when nearly everybody consumes something that cost money to produce without paying for it.

What would happen if a large gang of terrorists would break into food shops all over the world and everyday to steal food and run away with it? Wouldn't the authorities do something to protect their population and economy? They surely would.

This is what happens to music everyday. People from all over the world just steal it and consume it. But what do the authorities do to protect the ones producing it? Not much from what I know.

So, people keep on consuming music for free and think that it is free for real.

What is now left for artists is a tip-jar and we know that the tip-jar thing doesn't work, not even for Radiohead.

 

I didn't mean a solution where everyone can work in music/film who wants to; only a new, inexpensive way in, for a smart, determined or lucky few.  

 

pask74, if you could wave your magic want and eliminate all free music we would go back to the 70s, which I remember, and young people would start to listen to the same music over and over and over again.  It would make it even more difficult for new bands to gain an audience.  Everyone, young people especially, only have a limited amount of money to spend.  It's not like the 16-year-old has money stashed under his mattress he can pull out to pay for music he stole ;)

 

Whatever money people have to spend that trickles down to sound engineers is already being spent.  The question isn't about how many sound engineers can make a living, the question is allocation of engineering budgets (for 100 bands or 10,000?)

 

When I was young the Olympics meant rich white people with an interest in sports.  The "amateur" thing was actually exclusionary.  Then it was changed and penniless runners from Africa were able raise air-fare (from sponsors) and win races.  Yet today, most people who want to make a living as an athlete can't.  Economic structures change, but people always seem to re-create a star system. (In the Olympics, from trust funds to corporate sponsors).

 

What young people have trouble seeing is that EVERYONE wants to be someone.  No one WANTS to work in McDonalds.  How can everyone make a living then, in the arts?  If you want to be a sound engineer at your local church, or for corporate events, I'm pretty sure you can get those jobs.  

 

My parents pushed me into the Arts.  I worked in Hollywood for a few years, but came to my own conclusion that it wasn't for me (which I won't bore you with).  I'm pushing my kids into the Arts too, because I think all young people should pursue what they're interested because later in life you know too much ;)

 

Others have suggested in this thread, and I agree, that if you really, really want it, you can make a living in the Arts.  HOWEVER, it won't be a life you imagined as a young person.  I love the series Entourage because it makes show business realistic enough, shows just enough failure, to make the life-style seem plausible and attainable.  In real life you don't know if there's going to be a "next" episode.  So after a while most people make choices that give them more security.

 

Finally, as I tell my kids, all professionals ultimately make a living working in a narrow formula.  This is true for actors, singers, etc.  Yes, occasionally they'll go out and experiment.  But for the most part, we pay for what we can expect.  When my wife and I watch the "Good Wife" we expect a well-written character drama.  The artist on the show may want to do a torture scene out of "Scandal", but if they did I'd stop watching.  If I bought a Radio-head album and it was full of hard-core punk rock I'd probably wouldn't by their next album.  In short, all Art becomes a "Job".  That isn't necessarily a bad thing.  The life of Mick Jagger and your local high school principal isn't as dissimilar as it looks.

 

But I'm getting ahead of the story .... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget that most labels buy YouTube view by the thousands to inflate the audience's interest...

 

Everyone appears to be under the impression that the musicians are the ones who need Youtube, but.....

'>

 

Of the 100 most viewed videos of all time, 95 are music videos.

 

Maybe Youtube is the one who needs musicians. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...